Thursday, November 29, 2012

B - Impact of the Internet surfing on reading practices

Loan FA. Impact of the Internet surfing on reading practices and choices. Webology 2012;9(1)

A study was conducted to identify the impact of the Internet surfing on reading practices and choices of the net generation college students. A sample of 676 students was selected in some Indian colleges. Results reveal that the reading behaviour of the online readers is in transition as the Internet reading has increased non-sequential , interactive, superficial, and extensive reading. It is responsible for decreasing concentrated and in-depth reading.

Tuesday, November 27, 2012

B - Anatomy of open access publishing

Laakso M, Björk B. Anatomy of open access publishing: a study of longitudinal development and internal structure. BMC Medicine 2012;10:124
(doi: 10.1186/1741-7015-10-124)

This is the first study to provide comprehensive gold open access (OA) measurement for 2010 and 2011. Its primary aim was to measure the volume of scientific articles published in full immediate OA journals from 2000 to 2011, while observing longitudinal internal shifts in the structure of OA publishing concerning revenue models, publisher types and relative distribution among scientific disciplines. The secondary aim was to measure the share of OA articles of all journal articles.

B - Ghostwriting

Bosch X, Ross JS. Ghostwriting: research misconduct, plagiarism or fool's gold? The American Journal of Medicine 2012;125(4):324-326
(doi: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2011.07.015)

Ghostwriting and guest authorship practices are thought predominantly to occur when academic researchers collaborate with industry, however they also occur within purely academic collaborations. Those practices flourish as they are perceived as slight, easily comprehensible moral failing, rather than as unethical. The Office of Research Integrity should broaden its definition of fabrication and falsification of credentials, and thus of research misconduct, to explicitly include ghostwriting and guest authorship.

B - How to acknowledge crediting contributors

Rohlfing T, Poline JB. Why shared data should not be acknowledged on the author byline. Neuroimage 2012;59(4):4189-95

According to this article, the author byline should not be used to acknowledge shared data. It discusses viable alternatives for crediting non-author contributors, such as citations of papers describing shared data, reference to dataset publications, inclusion in the Acknowledgments section or in an Appendix.

B - Authorship problems in scholarly journals

Gasparyan AY, Ayvazyan L, Kitas GD. Authorship problems in scholarly journals: considerations for authors, peer reviewers and editors. Rheumatology International 2012 Nov 4 (Epub)
(doi: 10.1007/s00296-0'12-2582-2)

Authorship problems in scholarly journals are multifaceted. This article overviews common cases of inappropriate authorship (honorary, gift, guest and ghost) and suggests options to solve related problems by authors, reviewers and editors. It also discusses the contributorship criteria, still not well-validated. Many international associations are developing educational materials, guidelines and policy statements, incorporating authorship issues. It should be improved a global awareness of what constitutes authorship among authors authors, reviewers, editors and publishers, and the adherence to the editorial policies of learned associations and research institutions.

B - Duplicate publication and plagiarism

Maina S, Di Napoli M. Duplicate publication and plagiarism: is RHC safe? Reviews in Health Care 2012;3(4):225-227

While plagiarism obviously represents scientific misconduct, the so-called "self-plagiarism", or duplicate publication, is more controversial. It can include: same study sample, control data, or study outcomes; the so-called "salami slicing" (a large study sliced into several smaller studies); multiple submission; and republication in another language. Some authors are not aware of copyright rules, nor of publication ethics. Reviewers and editors have certainly an essential role in detecting any scientific misconduct and avoiding plagiarism and duplicate publication. Cooperation between editors and authors, and transparency are needed, too.